fix: 2.3.3.3.4.1: be specific about what to ignore #265
Conversation
|
This would have prevented my confusion in #264 . |
|
I think this change is unnecessary. I'm also generally -1 on making any further changes to the aplus spec at this point except if a serious vulnerability is involved. The aplus spec was/is an important cornerstone in unifying promise usage in the web - we should focus on native promises and the ECMAScript spec at this point. Lots of new specs could use love and parts of the web platform - I suggest we focus there. |
|
@benjamingr unnecessary, certainly. Possibly slightly helpful, I think so. Harmful in any way, certainly not. Easy math, don't you agree? |
| @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ To run `[[Resolve]](promise, x)`, perform the following steps: | |||
| 1. If/when `rejectPromise` is called with a reason `r`, reject `promise` with `r`. | |||
| 1. If both `resolvePromise` and `rejectPromise` are called, or multiple calls to the same argument are made, the first call takes precedence, and any further calls are ignored. | |||
| 1. If calling `then` throws an exception `e`, | |||
| 1. If `resolvePromise` or `rejectPromise` have been called, ignore it. | |||
| 1. If `resolvePromise` or `rejectPromise` have been called, ignore the exception `e`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When I read "it", I wrongly thought "it" refers to either resolvePromise or rejectPromise. This change should prevent the next possible confusion.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I think it's perfectly reasonable to change "it" to "e" here.
When I read "it", I wrongly thought "it" refers to either `resolvePromise` or `rejectPromise`. This change should prevent the next possible confusion. Closes promises-aplus#265
No description provided.